The CNS news page contained an ad asking “Can you detect fact from liberal media B.S.?,” so I didn’t bother to read it. The Politico story focused on the Obama Campaign’s social media efforts and their ability to use data that’s already available.
The totalitarian state watches everyone, but keeps its own plans secret. Privacy is seen as dangerous because it enhances resistance. Constantly spying and then confronting people with what are often petty transgressions is a way of maintaining social control and unnerving and disempowering opposition…. Thanks to Janna Malamud SmithI tire of responding to those. Let me offer one response that applies to all of them: I don’t trust my government, I don’t trust the people who work for my government, and I believe that the evidence suggests that it’s irrational to offer such trust.Let me close by repeating my four points from yesterday that guide my evaluation of such matters, this time without links:1. The government lies to you about the extent of its surveillance of you.2. The government says it needs secrecy, but lies about its secrets.3. The government says it needs expanded powers to fight terrorism, but lies: in fact it uses expanded “anti-terrorism” powers to advance a variety of domestic agendas.4. Terrorism is whatever the government says it is. Faced With The Security State, Groklaw Opts OutNumerous links in the article and linked articles, if you think you have nothing to fear from this type of oversight, you are naive. Still believe in Santa Claus too?
This was a big deal when Bush was in office, it’s an even larger deal under Obama. Get over it, your champion is not.
“How selectively myopic you are. So it was good when Dick and Bush took away your rights under the canard of fightin’ the turrurists over thar but now those same programs extended by Congress are somehow evil?”-ss, for the Republicans/Fox “news” viewers, there is but one single issue and that is hatred for Obama. -If Obama were replaced tomorrow by a Republican, say, Newt Gingrich or Rand Paul or even Dick Cheney, ALL of their privacy concerns would go away. ALL of them.-Pick an issue: health care, jobs, the economy, Egypt, anywhere in the Middle East. They have NO alternatives and they have no intention of trying to make things better. -Their only issue is hatred for Obama.
You realize she’s referring to “Organizing for America” and people have to opt-in to be in the “database”? No, of course not. Obama’s team was able to use the data they collected far more effectively than Romney’s people.
What people Don’t know is that this is independent of direct white house control! The other thing they forget is that this whole thing Was Started by Dubya! #rd. there would Not have been much fuss because This IS Partisan, fox has lots of viewers and they inflate and lie and anything they can to hate Obama. I don’t agree with a lot he has done, but with Romney, who would have done all the bad stuff and much more, we would really have Lots more problems.
It all goes back at least as far as the OSS and real threats in WW II, then the made-up threats to go with the war on Islam, er excuse me, “terrorism”, took the stops off.
It all goes back at least as far as the OSS and real threats in WW II, then the made-up threats to go with the war on Islam, er excuse me, “terrorism”, took the stops off.
“GOP accused him of being a limp-wristed apologizer weak on terror.”Obama has been hyper-aware of his image as a strong anti-terror fighter. Whatever his private thoughts, it’s been obvious that he will do all kinds of things to preserve that image.
lonecat over 10 years ago
I more or less most of the time with some pretty big qualifications support Obama, and I’m pretty upset about this program.
Jason Allen over 10 years ago
The CNS news page contained an ad asking “Can you detect fact from liberal media B.S.?,” so I didn’t bother to read it. The Politico story focused on the Obama Campaign’s social media efforts and their ability to use data that’s already available.
Enoki over 10 years ago
It’s NSA CYA not the other bits…
dpbriley over 10 years ago
The totalitarian state watches everyone, but keeps its own plans secret. Privacy is seen as dangerous because it enhances resistance. Constantly spying and then confronting people with what are often petty transgressions is a way of maintaining social control and unnerving and disempowering opposition…. Thanks to Janna Malamud SmithI tire of responding to those. Let me offer one response that applies to all of them: I don’t trust my government, I don’t trust the people who work for my government, and I believe that the evidence suggests that it’s irrational to offer such trust.Let me close by repeating my four points from yesterday that guide my evaluation of such matters, this time without links:1. The government lies to you about the extent of its surveillance of you.2. The government says it needs secrecy, but lies about its secrets.3. The government says it needs expanded powers to fight terrorism, but lies: in fact it uses expanded “anti-terrorism” powers to advance a variety of domestic agendas.4. Terrorism is whatever the government says it is. Faced With The Security State, Groklaw Opts OutNumerous links in the article and linked articles, if you think you have nothing to fear from this type of oversight, you are naive. Still believe in Santa Claus too?
This was a big deal when Bush was in office, it’s an even larger deal under Obama. Get over it, your champion is not.
dpbriley over 10 years ago
This one is even better . . . . Down To Just A Few Possibilities: President Obama Either Lied Or Is Ignorant About The NSA
Enoki over 10 years ago
So, Obama has put a stop to it hum? I think not. If anything Obama doubled down on the spying, renewed the Patriot Act, and even expaned it.
braindead Premium Member over 10 years ago
“How selectively myopic you are. So it was good when Dick and Bush took away your rights under the canard of fightin’ the turrurists over thar but now those same programs extended by Congress are somehow evil?”-ss, for the Republicans/Fox “news” viewers, there is but one single issue and that is hatred for Obama. -If Obama were replaced tomorrow by a Republican, say, Newt Gingrich or Rand Paul or even Dick Cheney, ALL of their privacy concerns would go away. ALL of them.-Pick an issue: health care, jobs, the economy, Egypt, anywhere in the Middle East. They have NO alternatives and they have no intention of trying to make things better. -Their only issue is hatred for Obama.
Uncle Joe Premium Member over 10 years ago
You realize she’s referring to “Organizing for America” and people have to opt-in to be in the “database”? No, of course not. Obama’s team was able to use the data they collected far more effectively than Romney’s people.
pam Miner over 10 years ago
What people Don’t know is that this is independent of direct white house control! The other thing they forget is that this whole thing Was Started by Dubya! #rd. there would Not have been much fuss because This IS Partisan, fox has lots of viewers and they inflate and lie and anything they can to hate Obama. I don’t agree with a lot he has done, but with Romney, who would have done all the bad stuff and much more, we would really have Lots more problems.
pam Miner over 10 years ago
In his 1st term Obama did manage to do something like 129 of his promises.
Dtroutma over 10 years ago
It all goes back at least as far as the OSS and real threats in WW II, then the made-up threats to go with the war on Islam, er excuse me, “terrorism”, took the stops off.
Dtroutma over 10 years ago
It all goes back at least as far as the OSS and real threats in WW II, then the made-up threats to go with the war on Islam, er excuse me, “terrorism”, took the stops off.
Uncle Joe Premium Member over 10 years ago
“GOP accused him of being a limp-wristed apologizer weak on terror.”Obama has been hyper-aware of his image as a strong anti-terror fighter. Whatever his private thoughts, it’s been obvious that he will do all kinds of things to preserve that image.
Jason Allen over 10 years ago
“Nice cherry pick……and now back to Water’s statement.”I’ll read the statement when it’s presented on a reputable website.
McSpook over 10 years ago
“The NAZI Dept. Of Justice”?Of all of the idiotic comments…I’d ask you "how dumb can you be?’But sadly, you’d take it as a challenge.